Talk:Ralink

serialmonkey's rt2x00 project is dead

The website of serialmonkey's rt2x00 is no more. Its last archived version on archive.org says it has been decommissioned because the drivers are not maintained anymore. We could update the article about that. I couldn't find any hint that the project was picked up by anyone else, so it seems there is simply no one maintaining the old Ralink chipsets anymore for Linux to this date (12th of March 2020). (there might be some remains of that work included in some distro's packages, otherwise one might have to use the Windows drivers with ndiswrapper or something alike. But I'm not sure these workarounds have their place in this article). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.14.137.165 (talk) 16:13, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Untitled

I read that the 2400 chipset (11 Mbps) indeed had problems but no such thing for the 2500 chipset (54 Mbps) that followed a few months later.

I would also like a citation on that. --ReCover 20:01, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

I _have_ an rt2400 and it works perfectly.

Edit: Dang it I take that back :(.

Astroturfing/Vandalism

I got rid of some of the marketing speak and redundant information inserted by User:Mo808. Some of it was slightly useful but it was definitly written as an advertisement and Wikipedia is not a place to advertise your product

if someone can find a 3rd party report that says they actually have 12% they can get rid of the 'claims' bit --Towel401 21:48, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

As of today the article is still written like an advert. --88.130.107.57 (talk) 01:47, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

802.11n

I added back in the 802.11n paragraph without the marketing names.

Ralink has 802.11n chipsets and are in the core testbed of the Wi-Fi Alliance. It can be verified here: http://www.wi-fi.org/newsrelease-051607-80211n-logo-testsuite

I'm open to other ways this can be written.

I think this is useful information to the public.

Mo808 00:19, 25 August 2007 (UTC)Mo808

Does not tell me anything. If that also should serve as an advert, you should try to make clearer, what you want to tell your customers.

No, seriously dude: Wikipedia is not for advertising. Our texts follow certain principles one of them being the neutral point of view. Your insertions into the article text in contrast were of an advertising character. Please comply with our rules in the future. --88.130.107.57 (talk) 01:47, 19 March 2011 (UTC)